Talk:Pikaness
Controversy The fact that there is an edit war emerging on this page indicates that pikaness is a controversial user. GMUN, I need to know why you think that pikaness is not controversial. I know you like pikaness, but the admins here have a responsibility to keep the Wiki fair. There are some parts of the Wiki that are negative towards me, yet I do not feel it should be censored. I'd prefer to have a discussion about this, before anyone messes with the article any further. It's not about the pikaness controversy, it's about having an unbiased and fair article. I hope everyone can understand what I'm trying to accomplish. -Zachnorn 08:06, 2 April 2008 (UTC) There isn't really an "edit war" though, the first edit of me taking out the Controversy tag was simply because the controversy tag was put on when there was the Pikagate info on this page, which has been moved over to it's own section since pikaness kept removing it I assume. So since the Pikagate was removed to it's own page, whatever is on this page doesn't seem controversial in the least, thus I removed it. There has only been one edit since then and that was from th3l3fty who has been getting on my nerves since the BE3/BE2R fiasco, and just undid what I did ias well as/i take off the "girl" banner-thingy, which I'd consider as a violation since the user, pikaness, is a girl as far as anyone else can know. Lefty's edit being combined with that violation, I just take it as a joke and undo it. <_< -GuessMyUserName 15:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC) The removal of the banner was completely legitimate; the combination of the facts that a) this is the Internet, and b) there is sufficient reason to doubt the claims of pikaness, are enough to warrant its removal. Additionally, while the Pikagate article does exist, there should be some form of mention of it on the page (considering the major role pikaness had in it). I will cede the controversy tag, so long as this article gives, at the very least, a brief mention (and a link) to that; however, until pikaness can sufficiently prove gender, the girl banner should not be used. Remember, the burden of proof lies on the individual user, not the rest of the board. And while I wouldn't expect you to understand, I take the wiki seriously and would never edit it for a joke. Save the reversions for vandalism and the like, not an edit you happen to disagree with. Th3l3fty 21:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Those facts together make no sense. "This is the Internet," followed by "We can't believe this user is a girl just because we haven't her for ourselves," just sounds stupid. If it's just the Internet, why can't you just believe what that person says about them self, especially considering it's only the gender of that person. Pikaness still claims to be a girl, so as far as anyone one the Internet should know, the user is female even if you can't believe the person behind it is. Just take a look, Clover Meadow is listed female B8, even though most people believe she's just an alt. I don't care about what you think, but when it comes to details about herself such as this, she is the only one who knows for sure. Besides, just because you don't have proof she's who she says doesn't mean there's nobody who does, so don't take your uninformed opinion to be too factual. And pikaness never actually had anything to do with the "Pikagate" incident anyways, all that happened was other people said stuff about her, and there was zero input from pikaness herself, so I don't think it should actually be linked on her page. With that said, I don't care too much if it is linked so whatever. And Lefty, I take this Wiki seriously too y'know, and don't change something based on "suspicion," especially when you don't even know much about what your making suspicions about compared to others. GuessMyUserName 02:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC) How about a truce- the girl banner gets to stay up, but at the expense of having pikagate linked from the article. --Ngamer 07:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC) I honestly don't mind too much whether the Pikagate link is in or not, it was pikaness her self that kept removing it from her page when it used to be here so you can take it up with her I guess, as unlikely as it is that she'd say something about it. But the girl banner shouldn't even have to be debated about staying up or not. As I said though, I don't mind the Pikagate being put in if it means halting of the banner being taken down profusely, because it's really just annoying and spiteful, keep it to yourself and leave suspicion out of a place meant for facts. GuessMyUserName 15:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC) I can accept the terms you laid out, Ngamer; however, don't think this justifies your opinion, GMUN. Considering pikaness has never proven gender to the board (it doesn't matter what you've been told), there is not sufficient reason to call it "fact." Also, discussing other articles is completely irrelevant to the matter at hand; that is a topic for another area. And please, stop responding as if your opinion is the only correct one. Th3l3fty 00:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC) As if my opinion is the only correct one? Says the man who believes his opinion on a someone's gender that he really doesn't know anything about is the correct one? I'm not talking about things I'm told, although the things I am told do give me assurance that what she speaks is true. Lefty, I don't know what goes on in your mind about me and pikaness, but do you seriously think I haven't looked into the whole her being who she says she is or not thing? I've looked into it more than anybody has, and I was even the one to discover a fair bit of the points that Smurf made on her "expose" topic, and what have you done? Just read upon the investigation that I still sought the doubtless conclusion to? Pikaness's gender isn't about "opinion", Lefty, it's about facts. Facts of which you have not looked upon as nearly as much as I have. And what do you mean the discussion of the Pikagate article being irrelevant? We're talking about whether it should be linked on the pikaness page here, and discussion about what's to go here is relevant. Have you forgotten what this discussion is about? Whether this page should have the controversy tag about, and Pikagate was what the whole controversy was about. And since that has been moved to its own page, this page is no longer one about controversy, but merely just a page about a user. GuessMyUserName 02:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC) I already agreed to the terms; stop making me regret that decision. And if you have such facts, why don't you, you know, show them? You can't just say, "I have facts that prove it, therefore you're wrong," without actually showing the facts. All you need to do is show these facts and I'll cede that point. Otherwise, it's baseless conjecture and it cannot be accepted as fact. I don't base these beliefs on my opinion but on what is known, and as far as I know, this information you have isn't known to anyone else. And the other article I was referring to was Clover Meadow, not Pikagate. Th3l3fty 13:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC) If I do have the proof, just ask yourself... why hasn't pikaness herself shown it to anyone but me? It's a private/personal thing, so much as that she's uncomfortable with an online community seeing of her. Now also if she were to give me such a proof, what would I do with that, knowing that she isn't comfortable with just anybody seeing? Would I stab her in the back and just flash her proof to anyone and everyone? I could never do that to someone I care about... and sometimes it's nice to feel special about being the only one to have such proof about and from someone you really like... <.<. Of course though, if you hadn't noticed I've been saying "if"... which there's a reason for, a reason of which I cannot tell... and I must point this "if" out to your attention, no matter how much it hurts my credibility... some things are more important than credibility to someone about something they have no business knowing about. GuessMyUserName 19:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC) Pikaness is a guy. The sooner you accept that fact, GMUN, the better. Stop making yourself into the laughing stock of the board. BMVlado 21:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC) ... I think I just peed myself! GuessMyUserName 22:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC) I see an edit war emerging again. Unless there are some major objections, I am going to add a link to Pikagate, add the Girl Banner, and remove the page from the Controversy category. This seems to be what was agreed upon, and I think that this is fair to everyone involved. Once again, this wiki is meant to have the least bias possible. pikaness is a controversial user, like it or not, and therefore should have some info about such controversy on the page, or linked to it. Feel free to change the page, I just did a quick addition, but I do want Pikagate linked, girl banner up, and no controversy category. -Zachnorn 16:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC) Thanks Zach, that sound fine... and uh, for the record, the recent "edit war" was just Sess vandalizing the page it seems. Not a big deal! GuessMyUserName 15:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC) Just Sess? Alright, no big deal then! Glad to see that we have all come to a compromise. -Zachnorn 17:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC) Smurf, please don't edit out the girl tag. As you see above, there was a lengthy conversation on the subject and we're sticking with the compromise that was reached, which is to say that the female pronouns stay but at the cost of having Pikagate linked. --Ngamer 18:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)